'Amazing Spider-Man 2' adding super-villain The Rhino

[NewWorldOrder]

I'm 30, obsessive Spidey fan going on 23 years and prefer the Raimi movies by a distance so that kinda disproves your theory.

 

That being said i feel we still haven't seen the "definitive Spidey" on the big sreen yet the same way we've seen Nolan's Batman or Wheadon's Avengers. Spider-Man 2 was closest but still not perfect.

 

Not really.

 

30 somethings are in the middle of both generations regarding Spider-man.

 

We didn't have the internet growing up or cell phone tills around age 18-20. So while I can see where 28+ ages can prefer Ditko/Romita's version we still never really grew up with adolescent spider-man story lines or issues. When I read Ultimate Spider-man #1 that immediately put me back in those HS years right away.

 

My first ASM was the Todd McFarlane run so in that timeline whether they want to admit it or not Peter was our current age during the TMc run.

 

I do like Spider-man 1 and 2 don't get me wrong, but lets face it Spider-man 3 was probably the biggest drop off from a previously successful movie sequel I can ever imagine since Godfather Part III. Sandman killed Ben Parker? Really Raimie, really? Venom was just am embarrassment.

 

IMPO I prefer Andrew Garfield's version of Spider-man by leapes and bounds over Tobey Maguire's.

I'd imagine all the horrible things that were contained within Spider-Man 3 had a whole lot more to do with the studio pushing what they wanted rather than what Sam wanted to do.

 

If that is true he should have walked away.

[Erndog]

That just seems like an awful lot of story to tell... and obviosuly not enough time in a 2 hr movie.

 

fingers crossed

[lscomics]

I'm 30, obsessive Spidey fan going on 23 years and prefer the Raimi movies by a distance so that kinda disproves your theory.

 

That being said i feel we still haven't seen the "definitive Spidey" on the big sreen yet the same way we've seen Nolan's Batman or Wheadon's Avengers. Spider-Man 2 was closest but still not perfect.

 

Not really.

 

30 somethings are in the middle of both generations regarding Spider-man.

 

We didn't have the internet growing up or cell phone tills around age 18-20. So while I can see where 28+ ages can prefer Ditko/Romita's version we still never really grew up with adolescent spider-man story lines or issues. When I read Ultimate Spider-man #1 that immediately put me back in those HS years right away.

 

My first ASM was the Todd McFarlane run so in that timeline whether they want to admit it or not Peter was our current age during the TMc run.

 

I do like Spider-man 1 and 2 don't get me wrong, but lets face it Spider-man 3 was probably the biggest drop off from a previously successful movie sequel I can ever imagine since Godfather Part III. Sandman killed Ben Parker? Really Raimie, really? Venom was just am embarrassment.

 

IMPO I prefer Andrew Garfield's version of Spider-man by leapes and bounds over Tobey Maguire's.

I'd imagine all the horrible things that were contained within Spider-Man 3 had a whole lot more to do with the studio pushing what they wanted rather than what Sam wanted to do.

 

If that is true he should have walked away.

That's why we ended up with a reboot, he refused to do a fourth after the studio crammed all their requirements down his throat.

[Prince Namor]

I'm 30, obsessive Spidey fan going on 23 years and prefer the Raimi movies by a distance so that kinda disproves your theory.

 

That being said i feel we still haven't seen the "definitive Spidey" on the big sreen yet the same way we've seen Nolan's Batman or Wheadon's Avengers. Spider-Man 2 was closest but still not perfect.

 

Not really.

 

30 somethings are in the middle of both generations regarding Spider-man.

 

We didn't have the internet growing up or cell phone tills around age 18-20. So while I can see where 28+ ages can prefer Ditko/Romita's version we still never really grew up with adolescent spider-man story lines or issues. When I read Ultimate Spider-man #1 that immediately put me back in those HS years right away.

 

My first ASM was the Todd McFarlane run so in that timeline whether they want to admit it or not Peter was our current age during the TMc run.

 

I do like Spider-man 1 and 2 don't get me wrong, but lets face it Spider-man 3 was probably the biggest drop off from a previously successful movie sequel I can ever imagine since Godfather Part III. Sandman killed Ben Parker? Really Raimie, really? Venom was just am embarrassment.

 

IMPO I prefer Andrew Garfield's version of Spider-man by leapes and bounds over Tobey Maguire's.

 

That bothers you more than the Burgler who killed Uncle Ben getting away?

[Prince Namor]

If Emma Stone hadn't been in the Amazing Spider-man to rekindle every comic nerds unrequited high school fantasy, that movie would be considered one of the biggest superhero turds ever made.

[The Madness]

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone as actors blow Tobey and Kirsten out of the water

[Prince Namor]

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone as actors blow Tobey and Kirsten out of the water

 

That's opinion, and one I'm not even sure how you'd prove, but supposing you could...

 

Chris Daughtry is a better pure singer than Mick Jagger.

Does that make the Daughtry Band better than the Rolling Stones?

No.

 

[Prince Namor]

And I'm still confused on this Emma Stone is a great actress thing. She seems more like the Meg Ryan of this generation.

Did I miss some outstanding performance by her in a movie?

Comic fans: Just because you wish you could bone somebody, does not make them a great actress.

[zosocane]

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone as actors blow Tobey and Kirsten out of the water

 

Does it matter? The 2012 ASM that Garfield and Stone starred in was -- at BEST -- a mediocre film. The same cannot be said of the first two Raimi films, which are solid movies throughout. I'm a huge Spidey fan, but when I think of 2012 superhero films, Avengers and TDK3 are what I remember. Sadly, ASM was just not a memorable film. Hopefully with this sequel they will get recapture the Spidey magic.

 

 

[Ken Aldred]

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone as actors blow Tobey and Kirsten out of the water

 

Does it matter? The 2012 ASM that Garfield and Stone starred in was -- at BEST -- a mediocre film. The same cannot be said of the first two Raimi films, which are solid movies throughout. I'm a huge Spidey fan, but when I think of 2012 superhero films, Avengers and TDK3 are what I remember. Sadly, ASM was just not a memorable film. Hopefully with this sequel they will get recapture the Spidey magic.

 

 

I was more interested in the Marvel Phase 1 films than Spider-Man, and the same for Marvel Phase 2 vs. Spider-Man 2, which is once again going to be triaged out of the way.

 

I like both the classic and Ultimate versions of Spider-Man, so it's nothing to do with any such comparison, but I can only get to a few films a year, and of all the Marvel output this film is the least important to me. Something to watch on TV sometime for free, that's all.

[zosocane]

I also don't see the comparison of the Raimi films and the Garfield film as 'classic' against 'ultimate' Spidey. In the Raimi films, Peter secretes web fluid to shoot webs; in the Garfield film, they go back to the Lee/Ditko idea of the web-shooter devised by a genius high school student. The Garfield film also has the character heckling his adversaries, which the Raimi films didn't do enough of. I would view the Garfield film more Lee/Ditko-esque (certainly 'classic'), while the Raimi films more of a Lee/Ditko/Romita/McFarlane amalgamation (classic and copper).

[NewWorldOrder]

I also don't see the comparison of the Raimi films and the Garfield film as 'classic' against 'ultimate' Spidey. In the Raimi films, Peter secretes web fluid to shoot webs; in the Garfield film, they go back to the Lee/Ditko idea of the web-shooter devised by a genius high school student. The Garfield film also has the character heckling his adversaries, which the Raimi films didn't do enough of. I would view the Garfield film more Lee/Ditko-esque (certainly 'classic'), while the Raimi films more of a Lee/Ditko/Romita/McFarlane amalgamation (classic and copper).

 

Have you read Ultimate Spider-man 1-10?

[zosocane]

I also don't see the comparison of the Raimi films and the Garfield film as 'classic' against 'ultimate' Spidey. In the Raimi films, Peter secretes web fluid to shoot webs; in the Garfield film, they go back to the Lee/Ditko idea of the web-shooter devised by a genius high school student. The Garfield film also has the character heckling his adversaries, which the Raimi films didn't do enough of. I would view the Garfield film more Lee/Ditko-esque (certainly 'classic'), while the Raimi films more of a Lee/Ditko/Romita/McFarlane amalgamation (classic and copper).

 

Have you read Ultimate Spider-man 1-10?

 

Yes. I've also read ASM #1 to #328. Have you?

[Buzzetta]

Has this been confirmed like JJ Abrams directing Star Wars confirmed

 

Or

 

Has this been confirmed like Howard Stern playing the scarecrow in the next Batman confirmed?

[The Madness]

And I'm still confused on this Emma Stone is a great actress thing. She seems more like the Meg Ryan of this generation.

Did I miss some outstanding performance by her in a movie?

Comic fans: Just because you wish you could bone somebody, does not make them a great actress.

 

I don't know if you were referring to my post about Garfield and Stone being better than Maguire and Dunst. But I never said she was a great actress. She's good. She's gone from doing comedy films to crime films and she's only 24. I was just saying there's no doubt in my mind that Emma Stone is the better actress. As far as Garfield goes, the guy is just far superior than Tobey. He won me over on his rage scene in The Social Network. But then again, it's all opinion. And don't forget, he's fooled literally everyone that watched the movie to think he wasn't British. At least everyone I knew. But then again, it's all opinion. Had Garfield and Stone been in the Raimi films instead, I believe the movies would've been better than what they already are. Maguire and Dunst just didn't do it for me.

[Prince Namor]

And I'm still confused on this Emma Stone is a great actress thing. She seems more like the Meg Ryan of this generation.

Did I miss some outstanding performance by her in a movie?

Comic fans: Just because you wish you could bone somebody, does not make them a great actress.

 

I don't know if you were referring to my post about Garfield and Stone being better than Maguire and Dunst. But I never said she was a great actress. She's good. She's gone from doing comedy films to crime films and she's only 24. I was just saying there's no doubt in my mind that Emma Stone is the better actress. As far as Garfield goes, the guy is just far superior than Tobey. He won me over on his rage scene in The Social Network. But then again, it's all opinion. And don't forget, he's fooled literally everyone that watched the movie to think he wasn't British. At least everyone I knew. But then again, it's all opinion. Had Garfield and Stone been in the Raimi films instead, I believe the movies would've been better than what they already are. Maguire and Dunst just didn't do it for me.

 

All just opinion, we each have one.

As for Garfield fooling everyone from knowing he's British; people have been pulling that trick off for decades. Andrew Lincoln, who plays Rick Grimes in the Walking Dead has a thick English accent, but you wouldn't know it from watching the show.

Dunst played a vampire at the age of 12 in Interview with a Vampire, for which she was nominated for a Golden Globe, done numerous comedies, and in 2011 won a Best Actress Award at the Cannes Film Festival and the Saturn Award for Best Actress for her performance in Lars von Trier's Melancholia.

Tobey Maguire's been nominated for the Screen Actors Guild and Golden Globe Awards and received two Saturn Awards, including one for Best Actor.

But once again, I guess it comes down to if you don't like them, you don't like them.

Doesn't mean they're not qualified performers.

 

[kdoginohio]

Paul Giamatti as Rhino?

 

Birth Name

Paul Edward Valentine Giamatti

Height

5' 8½" (1.74 m)-- From IMDB

 

Almost as bad as a 6' Wolverine.

[montrealfilmguy]

And I'm still confused on this Emma Stone is a great actress thing. She seems more like the Meg Ryan of this generation.

Did I miss some outstanding performance by her in a movie?

Comic fans: Just because you wish you could bone somebody, does not make them a great actress.

 

I don't know if you were referring to my post about Garfield and Stone being better than Maguire and Dunst. But I never said she was a great actress. She's good. She's gone from doing comedy films to crime films and she's only 24. I was just saying there's no doubt in my mind that Emma Stone is the better actress. As far as Garfield goes, the guy is just far superior than Tobey. He won me over on his rage scene in The Social Network. But then again, it's all opinion. And don't forget, he's fooled literally everyone that watched the movie to think he wasn't British. At least everyone I knew. But then again, it's all opinion. Had Garfield and Stone been in the Raimi films instead, I believe the movies would've been better than what they already are. Maguire and Dunst just didn't do it for me.

 

All just opinion, we each have one.

As for Garfield fooling everyone from knowing he's British; people have been pulling that trick off for decades. Andrew Lincoln, who plays Rick Grimes in the Walking Dead has a thick English accent, but you wouldn't know it from watching the show.

Dunst played a vampire at the age of 12 in Interview with a Vampire, for which she was nominated for a Golden Globe, done numerous comedies, and in 2011 won a Best Actress Award at the Cannes Film Festival and the Saturn Award for Best Actress for her performance in Lars von Trier's Melancholia.

Tobey Maguire's been nominated for the Screen Actors Guild and Golden Globe Awards and received two Saturn Awards, including one for Best Actor.

But once again, I guess it comes down to if you don't like them, you don't like them.

Doesn't mean they're not qualified performers.

 

 

Exactly.

 

Reminds me of the time Kristin Chenoweth went on Letterman acting all ditzy and goofy.

People in the comments went all ballistic about the "dumb blonde bimbo" and i said to everyone to go look up her Wiki page to see otherwise.

 

Its like we have this cosmic-sized library called the internet and sometimes nobody bothers taking a second to go see the facts.

 

But yes,i can understand that if you dont like someone,you dont like someone.

I hate Will Ferrell with all my might.

That is until i saw him act not Will Ferrell-like in Stranger than fiction

It's all about what you're given as material and story.

[Jeffro.]

Hey, I actually have an ASM 41. It's mid grade at best but I have one! Have a 43 that's much nicer.

[Jeffro.]

And I'm still confused on this Emma Stone is a great actress thing. She seems more like the Meg Ryan of this generation.

Did I miss some outstanding performance by her in a movie?

Comic fans: Just because you wish you could bone somebody, does not make them a great actress.

 

I don't get why so many people think Emma Stone is so incredibly hot. Not saying she's a dog in any sense, but the way some guys go gaga over her just baffles me.